JMS's Chronology of the Bengazi Raid and "cover-up"

[Thiebear]

Please post a link to this account from a reputable source if you have one... .

I'm very interested in understanding what happened and what the accusations say happened...

David Ignatius in Responding to accusations made by Fox News, says two CIA officials who were former Navy Seals were held up, by the CIA, but only for 20 minutes..

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/david-ignatius-benghazi-questions-the-administration-must-answer/2012/10/30/02d02538-22e2-11e2-8448-81b1ce7d6978_story.html

Say's nothing about painting a target with a laser or the like.... From what I understand Tyrone Woods was on the roof of the CIA annex and was killed by a motor shell.

From your link:

=============================

First, on the question of whether Woods and others were made to wait when they asked permission to move out immediately to try to rescue those at the consulate. The answer seems to be yes, but not for very long. There was a brief, initial delay — two people said it was about 20 minutes — before Woods was allowed to leave. One official said Woods and at least one other CIA colleague were “in the car revving the engine,” waiting for permission to go. Woods died about six hours later, after he returned to the annex

==================================

It establishes both were at the Annex (and heard the gunfire)

It establishes both were held up

It establishes he died on the roof to mortar fire

10:30 - 11 p.m.----Americans, except for the ambassador, retreat from the front gate in two cars to an annex a kilometer away.

That is short for:

CIA Agents at Annex disobey orders twice and go and rescue the people in the embassy.

They rescue people and get one body, collect 3 prisoners on the way

Make it back to the Annex.

One gets on the Roof with heavy gun and at one point lasers the enemy for air support that never comes.

They have to give the 3 prisoners to the Feb17th group against their wishes.

Mine sounds closer. What were you saying about Tripoli?

Seals don't appear to ever have gone to the embassy but rather arrived at the annex from Tripoli...

Do you still think this? How can he "return" to a place he never left? Or rev the engine of a car in front of the annex within 20minutes of the attack and die 6hours later (per your link)..

its 630miles between Tripoli and Benghazi. (13+hours to drive) 400miles flying?

If we used your original timeline and link:

9:45pm they Fly from Tripoli at 150-200mph Chanook speed (2+hours)? if left in 10minutes: 10pm, 11pm 12am. (timeline says 1am)

Request to go to the Embassy on phone after arriving at annex : Run out front and Rev engine waiting 20 minutes: 2am?

When the people had left the embassy 1 mile away in 2 cars 3hours ago to come to the Annex???

So from your link he was in front of the Annex at 1am+ 20minutes Reving the engine to go get the people that at that point had been in the Annex for 3 hours?

they asked permission to move out immediately to try to rescue those at the consulate. The answer seems to be yes, but not for very long. There was a brief, initial delay — two people said it was about 20 minutes — before Woods was allowed to leave. One official said Woods and at least one other CIA colleague were “in the car revving the engine,” waiting for permission to go

Per your link: Woods couldn't die 6hours later after returning to the Annex if he never left, and especially if he didn't get there until 1+am.

JMS: You want to criticize Obama... you don't have to make things up... hit him on the economy.. I think there is plenty there to criticize him on... I just don't see it here. Frankly I think the Republicans trying to make something of this, impacts there credibility.

Do the right thing and take the Quotes off of "Cover-up" or remove the word altogether. It's ****ing disrespectful!

This is not a stupid thing like a birth certificate.

8yrs and i think this is the only topic I've ever reported to hopefully have removed or closed so it can fall away. Serious Trolling attempt.

[JMS]

That's kinda what pisses me off the most. Joke about it, go ahead, but in the meantime our own people were murdered while the President takes the credit for killing OBL, and deflects the criticism of handling Bengazi...typical.

:doh:

[Madison Redskin]

This thread is proof that Fox News can manufacture a crisis. We're talking about what Obama SAID ... AFTER 4 people were murdered. Give me a ****ing break.

The craptastic stuff that Fox News commentators are saying about this "story" is laughable. The fact that so many are buying it is not.

---------- Post added October-31st-2012 at 11:28 PM ----------

Didn't you get the memo? The Dem senator is allowed to make stuff up, but the Rep talk show host is not allowed. I mean, Romney can always show his taxes, but Obama doesn't have to show any emails or his birth certificate, or some kind of logic like that.

Are you still stuck on the birth certificate? Please ... continue.

[JMS]

It establishes both were at the Annex (and heard the gunfire)

It establishes both were held up

It establishes he died on the roof to mortar fire

Yes non of that is in dispute... They were held up for 20 minutes by the CIA as the CIA tried to get assistance from libyans. It doesn't say Obama held them up for hours, or even the military held them up. Nor does it say anyting about Woods being exposed with a lasser painting a target for a bomb that some higher up ordered never dropped.

At least I've seen no links to that account yet. I have heard those accounts in this thread and by others.

its 630miles between Tripoli and Benghazi. (13+hours to drive) 400miles flying?

Yeah but the WSJ timeline does say: "After 1 a.m.:U.S. security reinforcements from Tripoli arrive, head to annex."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444620104578008922056244096.html

Which means they would have been dispatched after the consolate alarms sounded around 9pm by the timeline. Woods is killed after 2am.

So this tells us either Woods was one of the guys sent from Tripoli which would conflict with what Ignatious said about having been to the embassy, or the Annex did recieve re-enforcements sent shortly after the attack began.

Do the right thing and take the Quotes off of "Cover-up" or remove the word altogether. It's ****ing disrespectful!

This is not a stupid thing like a birth certificate. 8yrs and i think this is the only topic I've ever reported to hopefully have removed or closed so it can fall away. Serious Trolling attempt.

I don't mean to be trolling, I think you did make one valid point. That Woods was not among those contractors who came from Tripoli and arrived at the annex after 1am.

The points I don't think you substantiated were (1) Woods was painting a target on the roof of the building when he was killed by a morter attack, (2) That there were even American bombers or air cover in teh area at the time. (3) That there is any sort of cover up here. (4) That there was a failure of leadership here. (5) That Obama's bares responsibility for that failure of leadership

---------- Post added November-1st-2012 at 01:40 AM ----------

He's going to counter without actually answering the question. That's how they handle it...deflect, deflect, deflect...it's like talking to a cowboys fan. Don't actually admit that you have done anything incorrect, or wrong, just point at others and say it's their fault, while taking credit for the things that actually do go right...

Harry Reid said he had several creditable sources who told him this... The Senate Majority leader said he had several creditable sources who told him Mitt Romney paid not taxes for years at a time.... All Mitt Romney had to do to blow him out of the water was to release his taxes, or at least release how much he paid in taxes for the given years. Mitt Romney didn't answer the question...

Hell the democrats told romney all he had to do to silence them was to release 1 additional year of his tax returns... the returns for the year the IRS had the tax amnesty which is what Harry Reid and many other democrats believe Mitt Romney took advantgage off.. Release that 1 year

Now who could possible have told Harry Reid that? Hell the head of the IRS could have told Harry Reid that..

---------- Post added November-1st-2012 at 01:49 AM ----------

Just to throw some more fuel on the fire, Panetta abruptly announced on October 18th that General Carter Ham, current Commander of Africom, would be replaced by General David Rodriguez. If we're talking rumors, it has been rumored that it is from Ham's group that the information regarding available assets not being deployed came from White House/Washington Command and Control, not the field commanders. Thus far he's been a good soldier and only publicly stated that assets were available but were never ordered into action.

Yes and so far there is a Washington Times blog source which is the only source I could find making that connection....

“The speculation that General Carter Ham is departing Africa Command (AFRICOM) due to events in Benghazi, Libya on 11 September 2012 is absolutely false. General Ham's departure is part of routine succession planning that has been on going since July.

http://www.examiner.com/article/pentagon-denies-claims-general-was-fired-over-benghazi-attacks

[Thiebear]

JSM: Do you acknowledge that Harry Reid early in his career Falsely made the Exact same accusation. That in his own book he lamented saying it and apologized.

Yes/No:

Your premise wasn't to get the Timeline correct: Your premise was to shame republicans into not putting up a fuss as they are pre-emptively discreded as you've stated.

JMS: You want to criticize Obama... you don't have to make things up... hit him on the economy.. I think there is plenty there to criticize him on... I just don't see it here. Frankly I think the Republicans trying to make something of this, impacts there credibility

Your timeline conflicts with itself yet you require I substantiate points i've never made: 1 was from me and what i've read...2,3,4,5 I didn't say and I actually asked you to remove "Cover Up" I didn't try and prove it.

All i did was point out your timeline is impossible based on your own link.

JMS: The points I don't think you substantiated were (1) Woods was painting a target on the roof of the building when he was killed by a morter attack, (2) That there were even American bombers or air cover in teh area at the time. (3) That there is any sort of cover up here. (4) That there was a failure of leadership here. (5) That Obama's bares responsibility for that failure of leadership

Go back and fix your timeline and ask people to help you next time vs. starting with a conclusion and working your way back from there.

[Tweedr01]

This thread is proof that Fox News can manufacture a crisis. We're talking about what Obama SAID ... AFTER 4 people were murdered. Give me a ****ing break.

The craptastic stuff that Fox News commentators are saying about this "story" is laughable. The fact that so many are buying it is not.

---------- Post added October-31st-2012 at 11:28 PM ----------

Are you still stuck on the birth certificate? Please ... continue.

I really don't care about the birth certificate crap, it's on par with asking for Romney's taxes, but apparently that IS up for debate while Big O's birth certificate is not. The bias is in full swing, and the only response is deflect and smiley faces.

---------- Post added November-1st-2012 at 08:16 AM ----------

JSM: Do you acknowledge that Harry Reid early in his career Falsely made the Exact same accusation. That in his own book he lamented saying it and apologized.

Yes/No:

Your premise wasn't to get the Timeline correct: Your premise was to shame republicans into not putting up a fuss as they are pre-emptively discreded as you've stated.

Your timeline conflicts with itself yet you require I substantiate points i've never made: 1 was from me and what i've read...2,3,4,5 I didn't say and I actually asked you to remove "Cover Up" I didn't try and prove it.

All i did was point out your timeline is impossible based on your own link.

Go back and fix your timeline and ask people to help you next time vs. starting with a conclusion and working your way back from there.

Again, he's just gonna deflect, or build some strawman argument which you never made. This is typical, you are not allowed to hold Big O responsible, I mean they didn't do that to Bush did they? Oh wait...

[btfoom]

I find it pointless the speculate until we have all the facts released on this story. We can politicize the hell out of it but then we're just as slimy as the pols who are presently doing exactly that. I'll pass for now till I know the full story. Hopefully we have some genuine disclosure on this since we all deserve it just like the families of the fallen do.

This has been my biggest issues since the beginning.

4 Americans are dead during an attack on September 11 (more than 6 weeks ago) and we STILL don't have many of the facts. That is completely unacceptable.

Just today, this story leaked:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/31/exclusive-us-memo-warned-libya-consulate-couldnt-withstand-coordinated-attack/

Why has none of this information been made public before? Any other memos/e-mails/discussions being held back?

Folks here can blame "Fox News", but the bigger issue is that most other news organizations have completely ignored this attack.

[Bang]

Well, it could be thy don't have all the facts as of yet, and it also could be that presenting the facts as they know them could compromise something else.

This is my problem with this whole post-Bengazi fistwaving.. We're in an unusual war against an unsual enemy.. we typicals out here are not going to understand it all, nor can we know it all... and most importantly, they can't tell us everything becaue of the ramifications it may have elsewhere. Loose lips don't need to sink ships anymore. facebook can do it instantly. Anything WE know, our enemy also knows, instantly.

This huge question should temper the demands for answers that may not be available as of yet, for many reasons.

You guys sound like truthers screaming cover-up.

I wonder, does all of this politically motivated bull**** help or hinder the mission of our military?

This game and those questions were asked before, and they didn't help then. But now that the roles are reversed, no one seems to remember that.

Disunity favors the enemy

And the enemy seems to know that.

We don't because we're too ignorant and self righteous to give a ****.

~Bang

[JMS]

Your premise wasn't to get the Timeline correct: Your premise was to shame republicans into not putting up a fuss as they are pre-emptively discreded as you've stated.

Shame Republicans by publishing a timeline and asking for comments and sources?

Your timeline conflicts with itself yet you require I substantiate points i've never made:

My timeline didn't substantially conflict with itself and "my" timeline is sourced from the WSJ, unlike any of your accusations.

10:30 - 11 p.m.----Americans, except for the ambassador, retreat from the front gate in two cars to an annex a kilometer away.

That is short for:

CIA Agents at Annex disobey orders twice and go and rescue the people in the embassy.

They rescue people and get one body, collect 3 prisoners on the wayMake it back to the Annex.

One gets on the Roof with heavy gun and at one point lasers the enemy for air support that never comes.They have to give the 3 prisoners to the Feb17th group against their wishes.

.

You've said all this... where is your source?

---------- Post added November-1st-2012 at 09:58 AM ----------

IAgain, he's just gonna deflect, or build some strawman argument which you never made. This is typical, you are not allowed to hold Big O responsible, I mean they didn't do that to Bush did they? Oh wait...

I don't even know what your critism of Obama or the handling of this attack are. All I'm asking for is what is the critism, and for a source which demonstrate the issue you are discussing, preferable from a reliable source and not a blog..

---------- Post added November-1st-2012 at 10:21 AM ----------

This has been my biggest issues since the beginning.

4 Americans are dead during an attack on September 11 (more than 6 weeks ago) and we STILL don't have many of the facts.

Like what facts don't you think we have? I mean folks are just making stuff up as far as I can tell.

That is completely unacceptable.

Just today, this story leaked:

That's not really a story though is it. We have hundreds of consulates and embassies around the world an none are staffed to defend themselves when attacked by 150 well armed terrorists... None. Just like none of the embasies here in DC could defend themselves if 150 terrorists attacked them unless they had the assistance of the US government.

Hell at the hight of the Vietnam war our embassy in Vietnam was assulted and comprimised by fewer VC than the Bengahzi consulate faced.... None of that should be news to you.

Why has none of this information been made public before? Any other memos/e-mails/discussions being held back?

Folks here can blame "Fox News", but the bigger issue is that most other news organizations have completely ignored this attack.

Either the mainstream press is in a conspiracy to not cover the news and only Fox news is being honest here, only Fox news is finding new information that is relivent...

or

The mainstream media has covered this story and doesn't think new information is coming to light while fox news is manufacturing headlines and obfuscating what really happenned.

Look, he’s (Obama) the one who’s not putting – he’s the one who’s creating this vacuum. He’s the one who has the information who could tell us. He’s the one who can get on TV and tell us. He’s not. And so we may be getting it wrong but if we’re getting it wrong, it’s his fault.

......

If we have it wrong, you know, if we’re taking the wrong assumptions from the written word that we have, I blame the administration because they’re the ones that had the information. They’re the ones who represent the American people and they’re the ones who created this problem for themselves.

[LadySkinsFan]

I noticed last night on Greta Sustren that they were doubling down on the Bengazi "story" and I think it's to deflect Christie's thanks to the President and his willingness to work in a true bipartisan manner during a disaster that's affecting millions of our Americans.

But you know, they are preaching to their particular choir.

Independents, being independent, are watching other things going on, like the disaster. And maybe Romney's frequent denouncing of FEMA, except for his flip flop today in which he now embraces FEMA.

So tell me, those who embrace the view that Federal government should be smaller and we should all just fend for ourselves, how many of you and yours were affected by this storm or if you would be affected by a future storm where you lose everything and yet you don't expect the Federal government to come in and get basic services like power, sewage, running water, roads, etc. up and running. Or are the states and individuals just supposed to suck it up and do everything themselves?

[Thiebear]

Shame Republicans by publishing a timeline and asking for comments and sources?

My timeline didn't substantially conflict with itself and "my" timeline is sourced from the WSJ, unlike any of your accusations.

[/b]

Did you post this:

JMS: You want to criticize Obama... you don't have to make things up... hit him on the economy.. I think there is plenty there to criticize him on... I just don't see it here. Frankly I think the Republicans trying to make something of this, impacts there credibility.

Did you answer my Reid question: Yes/No

Did one of the people that came from Tripoli (now end up at the Annex) from the beginning: Yes/No

You again slid sideways on my quotes of you and only answer what you want leaving out large chunks.

Okay I'm done, I believe if you read JSM's timeline and Republican punk quote and my responses I think i'm being more honest. I'll wait another week before revisiting this travesty.

The Below post is the JMS we know and love. Timeline turned into : George Bush/Dick Cheney

[JMS]

I absolutely think Fox News is trying to manufacture controversy here. I absolutely think Gretta Van Susteren's comments above is a liscense and excuse to knowingly lie to their audience who from my perspective already have a loose hold on reality to begin with. I think the entire outrage is fueled by hearing misleading facts, and manufactured facts which is shame on Fox News... but beyond that it's fueled by a willfull denial of what every one of these delusional Foxbot's should know very very well; That it takes time to uncover what occured... Not 1-2 weeks time, but months; That is reasonable... Took us decades to hear from Sec Def, Robert MacNamera that the Gulf of Tonkin attacks on the USS Maddox and USS Turner Joy August 4th 1964 never actually occured.... The attacks which were used at the time to pass the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution which justified the entire US involvement in the Vietnam war leading to tens of thousands of American deaths....

“It was just confusion, and events afterwards showed that our judgment that we’d been attacked that day was wrong. It didn’t happen.” ~

It took years for George W. Bush to admit that Iraq was not behind 9/11. Had nothing to do with 9/11; which he only did after we have invaded Iraq...

For years after 9/11/2001 Bush associated Iraq to the 9/11 attacks..

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3119676.stm

US Invades Iraq March 19, 2003 ...

So much so that months after we invaded 70% of the US Public believed Saddam Hussein was behind the 9/11 attacks;

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-09-06-poll-iraq_x.htm

But they were wrong.

September 17, 2003

President Bush, having repeatedly linked Saddam Hussein to the terrorist organization behind the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, said yesterday there is no evidence that the deposed Iraqi leader had a hand in those attacks, in contrast to the belief of most Americans.

http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/Bush-No-Iraq-link-to-9-11-found-1124580.php

It took nearly a decade for Dick Cheney to admit that Iraq was not behind 9/11..

June 14 2004

Vice President Dick Cheney said Thursday the evidence is "overwhelming" that al Qaeda had a relationship with Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq, and he said media reports suggesting that the 9/11 commission has reached a contradictory conclusion were "irresponsible."

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/06/18/cheney.iraq.al.qaeda/

6/2/2009

Former Vice President Dick Cheney says there was “never any evidence” that Saddam Hussein’s Iraq played any role in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on New York and Washington.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0609/23228.html

Yet there is a conspiracy and coverup because Obama administration didn't know exactly who did what 10 days after Bengahzi?

[Madison Redskin]

I would like to hear someone articulate what Obama did in connection with the Bengazi raid that was wrong?

[Tweedr01]

Totally forgot the other go to: "It's all Bush's fault"

Pretty sure Bush got totally blasted for what he did, am I wrong?

[Predicto]

I would like to hear someone articulate what Obama did in connection with the Bengazi raid that was wrong?

He was Barack Hussein Obama at all times during the raid. Therefore, he must have done something wrong and he must be covering up something.

-FoxNews

[BearintheATL]

Yes and so far there is a Washington Times blog source which is the only source I could find making that connection....

What would you expect them to come out and say?

---------- Post added November-1st-2012 at 01:22 PM ----------

I would like to hear someone articulate what Obama did in connection with the Bengazi raid that was wrong?

Why continue the idea that this had anything to do with a video? Why even come out with a story so quickly?

I'll grant that the MMQBing of the military options is still a little grasping in the dark at this point, but will eventually come to light, but why the necessity for cover early, and why the stonewalling now?

[SteveFromYellowstone]

To be fair, is this any different than Reid saying he was told by a reliable source close to Romney that Romney paid zero taxes for a few years?

But like you said, if the major networks had them, they would have been released by now, unless there were questions about authenticity. That's the only reason something like that gets held back.

Also, "major networks" includes Fox. If ABC has them, you can be damn sure Fox has them too.

Well the difference is that the Romney taxes thing might be true since the only returns he did release had artificially higher rates

There are no secret emails

[deejaydana]

The truth of the matter is we simply don't know yet what happened and if there is blame to be doled out to State, the WH or whomever was involved we simply have to let the truth come forward. To dismiss this as something that's manufactured by Fox OR to also condemn Obama both seem like foolishness to me or at the very least incredibly immature and premature. We simply don't know. None of you do.

[Bang]

The truth of the matter is we simply don't know yet what happened and if there is blame to be doled out to State, the WH or whomever was involved we simply have to let the truth come forward. To dismiss this as something that's manufactured by Fox OR to also condemn Obama both seem like foolishness to me or at the very least incredibly immature and premature. We simply don't know. None of you do.

This is exactly right. We may not know, and even if we do it may not be prudent to disclose everything at this time for a myriad of reasons that have nothing to do with politics, and everything to do with the war effort or the security of personel overseas..

~Bang

[JMS]

Did you post this:

Yes, obviously, are you shamed that I posted it? and is that an admission that it's accurate; and if not why is it in context?

Did you answer my Reid question: Yes/No

Yes Post #29, Reid did give his evidence, he sited two sources whom he trusted.. Evidently staking his reputation on the validity of what he said. And since Romney declined to even refute Rieds accusation Ried's reputation remains largely intact from this exchange.

Did one of the people that came from Tripoli (now end up at the Annex) from the beginning: Yes/No

Yes. The WSJ Timeline sais re-enforcements reached the Annex after 1am from Tripoli. and they headed for the Anex.... as is reflected in the timeline, and thoughout this thread..

You again slid sideways on my quotes of you and only answer what you want leaving out large chunks.

I'm trying to address your questions head on and would appreciate the same considerations rather than sophmoric plays on my handle.

Okay I'm done, I believe if you read JSM's timeline and Republican punk quote and my responses I think i'm being more honest. I'll wait another week before revisiting this travesty.

You haven't really revised, sourced or even restated any of your assertions... I'm asking you as I've asked you countless times during this thread... What do you think happenned, why was it a failure of leadership or whatever term of outrage you want to use, and what sources do you have to support your position.

That's the question I would like you to take an honest stab at. Tell us what you thnk you know, and source it... Then in a few weeks or month we can see how it sorts out with what we find out.. I've given you what I consider to be a decent timeline from what I consider to be a reputable source, even though the source is owned by the same guy who owns Fox news, which I struggle to consider a reputable source.

The Below post is the JMS we know and love. Timeline turned into : George Bush/Dick Cheney

Absoutely correct.. Why would the track record of a Democratic Adminstration in the 1060's, or a Republican Administration in 2003 and how long it took them to get a handle on a crisis; possible be relivent when considering what's reasonable for a President in 2012....

I think it's a perfectly valid point and I agree drawing historical comparisons is a typical JMS technique when I'm trying to figure out if a Presidential behavior is reasonable..

And I evidenly do so across party lines because in 2003 I was a life long republican who had never voted for a Democrat for public office in my life... Kerry was my first, and he was a protest vote reaction to Bush having taken 3 years to come clean on 9/11.

[SteveFromYellowstone]

I really don't care about the birth certificate crap, it's on par with asking for Romney's taxes, but apparently that IS up for debate while Big O's birth certificate is not. The bias is in full swing, and the only response is deflect and smiley faces.

---------- Post added November-1st-2012 at 08:16 AM ----------

Again, he's just gonna deflect, or build some strawman argument which you never made. This is typical, you are not allowed to hold Big O responsible, I mean they didn't do that to Bush did they? Oh wait...

You honestly think asking for Romney's tax returns is on par with the whole Obama birth certificate bs? Wow....

You don't like to deal in facts do you? The world is so simple to republicans like you, Obama=bad republican=good, and you'll ignore whatever contradicts your worldview

How, in anyones mind, can Romney refusing to release tax returns (which answers valid questions about his tax policy and claims he's made in the campaign) be equal to birther crap that the republicans have made up to hoodwink people like you

[JMS]

You honestly think asking for Romney's tax returns is on par with the whole Obama birth certificate bs? Wow....

You don't like to deal in facts do you? The world is so simple to republicans like you, Obama=bad republican=good, and you'll ignore whatever contradicts your worldview

How, in anyones mind, can Romney refusing to release tax returns (which answers valid questions about his tax policy and claims he's made in the campaign) be equal to birther crap that the republicans have made up to hoodwink people like you

He's trolling, don't encourage him by trying to use reason to make your point against him. He's willfully oblivious to such an exersize. We are waiting for someone to actually tell us what they think happenned and source it which conflicts with the given timeline.

[JMS]

This is exactly right. We may not know, and even if we do it may not be prudent to disclose everything at this time for a myriad of reasons that have nothing to do with politics, and everything to do with the war effort or the security of personel overseas..

~Bang

It may be reasonable, but it's not what's going on. What's going on is the tin foil hat folks are hearing from Fox news that President Obama personally stopped military assets hovering over our annex from supporting US personell in harms way.. I've even heard that the entire attack was a ploy set up with Obama's particiapation to kidnap the ambassador in order to trade him for a high level terrosit asset whom Obama doesn't have the political clout to trade on his own... Absurd....

I think focusing on what we actually know is perfectly reasonable even if we don't and won't know everything for a while. I think it's perfectly reasonable to discuss what we do know, what we think we know; and why. Which is all we can do right now.

[PeterMP]

I really don't care about the birth certificate crap, it's on par with asking for Romney's taxes, but apparently that IS up for debate while Big O's birth certificate is not. The bias is in full swing, and the only response is deflect and smiley faces.

There is a FUNDAMENTAL difference.

Without a time machine, Obama can't PROVE that he was born in the US.

He can't PROVE that somebody forged is birth certificate (or the state of HI didn't really care back than when issuing birth certificates) AND somebody placed a story in the HI paper, but he was REALLY born in Kenya (or whereever).

Romney COULD release is tax records (like every other Presidential candidate going how ever far back).

Now, if he did so, and people came back and said those aren't what he REALLY paid, then your point would be valid.

EVERY CASE where somebody is saying X w/o much (or no) evidence is NOT the equavilent to Romney's taxes (I've also seen it comparted to Newts comments about "secret e-mails" related to Bengazi).

Because the issue is the standard of proof. If people are willing to go to a place of some real secret, extremely powerful, and unknown group acting in a secret manner, then that becomes really hard to disprove.

Romney's taxes could have been released. Lot's of people have done it.

[Bang]

It may be reasonable, but it's not what's going on. What's going on is the tin foil hat folks are hearing from Fox news that President Obama personally stopped military assets hovering over our annex from supporting US personell in harms way... I think focusing on what we actually know is perfectly reasonable even if we don't and won't know everything for a while. I think it's perfectly reasonable to discuss what we do know, what we think we know; and why. Which is all we can do right now.

I agree with this as well.

The tin foil hats have got to go, and that is more to my agreement with DeeJay. A lot of people are convinced that because they don't know everything and have not been told everything that it must be a conspiracy.. and there doesn't seem to be much thought amoing that group as to any other possible explanation. (including the very logical assumption that in wartime, we aren't going to be told everything, and for good reason.)

This thread is a fine idea to debunk that junk with what we do know to be fact, and separate it from speculation.

~Bang